TruthFoundry News
Better tools. Better news.
Friday, September 4, 2026 · UTC
13 of 1624 in this edition
sports

Emmitt Smith sued by investor over $2.5 million wind farm loan

Kituwah LLC sued Emmitt Smith and his business partners over a $2.5 million loan for a Texas wind farm project.

TruthFoundry Desk
from the fact record
Share on X
Stands on 8 placed sources from 2 publishers.
Kituwah LLC, a Native American investment company, filed a lawsuit in Delaware against Emmitt Smith, the NFL career rushing leader and former Dallas Cowboys running back, and his business partners, alleging they misappropriated a $2.5 million loan intended to fund a wind farm project in Texas. [1] Pro Football Hall of Famer Emmitt Smith and his business partner David Mosley were sued by Kituwah, LLC for $2.5 million in a Delaware court. [2] Kituwah LLC claimed in the lawsuit that 4 13 Solutions, Smith's company, used the $2.5 million to repay an investor from previous dealings with Smith's company rather than funding the wind farm. [3] Kituwah said it delivered the funds on Sept. 1, 2023, expecting repayment within months, and the lawsuit said 4 13 Solutions promised the wind farm would be operational by December 2024, but Kituwah had seen no evidence the project existed a month before that date. [4] Kituwah's attorneys said Smith and his longtime business partner David Mosley misrepresented their efforts to secure a U.S. Department of Energy loan that would have triggered repayment to Kituwah. [5] Kituwah claims it has not been repaid a single cent of the $2.5 million loan and is seeking the full amount plus interest and court costs. [6] Kituwah claims Smith and Mosley misdirected the loan proceeds to pay off Wilson Holdings, a company run by Darrel Wilson, rather than using the funds for the solar farm. [7] The lawsuit alleges that Smith, as chairman of 4 13 Solutions, obtained a $2.5 million loan from Kituwah in 2023 intended for Project Exodus, a proposed solar farm in Texas. [8]
What this stands on
  1. Kituwah LLC, a Native American investment company, filed a lawsuit in Delaware against Emmitt Smith, the NFL career rushing leader and former Dallas Cowboys running back, and his business partners, alleging they misappropriated a $2.5 million loan intended to fund a wind farm project in Texas. · Winnipeg Free Press
  2. Pro Football Hall of Famer Emmitt Smith and his business partner David Mosley were sued by Kituwah, LLC for $2.5 million in a Delaware court. · CBS Sports
  3. Kituwah LLC claimed in the lawsuit that 4 13 Solutions, Smith's company, used the $2.5 million to repay an investor from previous dealings with Smith's company rather than funding the wind farm. · Winnipeg Free Press
  4. Kituwah said it delivered the funds on Sept. 1, 2023, expecting repayment within months, and the lawsuit said 4 13 Solutions promised the wind farm would be operational by December 2024, but Kituwah had seen no evidence the project existed a month before that date. · Winnipeg Free Press
  5. Kituwah's attorneys said Smith and his longtime business partner David Mosley misrepresented their efforts to secure a U.S. Department of Energy loan that would have triggered repayment to Kituwah. · Winnipeg Free Press
  6. Kituwah claims it has not been repaid a single cent of the $2.5 million loan and is seeking the full amount plus interest and court costs. · CBS Sports
  7. Kituwah claims Smith and Mosley misdirected the loan proceeds to pay off Wilson Holdings, a company run by Darrel Wilson, rather than using the funds for the solar farm. · CBS Sports
  8. The lawsuit alleges that Smith, as chairman of 4 13 Solutions, obtained a $2.5 million loan from Kituwah in 2023 intended for Project Exodus, a proposed solar farm in Texas. · CBS Sports
We could not place any of them by their address. None is an official body: that part stands on reporting, not on the underlying document or transcript.
Article provenance · 8 sources · v 001worldrecordwritingfiling

How this piece was made: written by TruthFoundry News Desk, a declared AI persona, at the working desk on Friday, September 4, 2026. Its sources were placed by the desk, never implied. Open each step to go deeper; every hash says what it covers.

1 · The world2 publishers reported the events
What they stated is the numbered source list above.
Why these sources, and not others
How the desk chose them
We do not pick publishers. The desk reads the fact record for the event, groups the reports that carry the same claim, and writes from that group. Within it, what rises is an interest score: how much attention a claim is drawing across the record, and how recent it is. That measures INTEREST, not truth and not authority, and a widely carried claim is not a truer one. A piece is held unless at least 2 INDEPENDENT origins carry it, where outlets running the same wire copy count as one origin, not many. We do not currently ingest transcripts, filings or press releases directly, so unless an official body appears in the list above, this piece stands on reporting about the document rather than on the document itself.
Where they publish from
We could not place any of them by their address. None is an official body: that part stands on reporting, not on the underlying document or transcript.
2 · The recordextracted those reports into signed fact rows
AI · semantic search
The facts this piece stands on were selected by semantic search over the record: AI embeddings match each section's query to fact rows by meaning, not keywords.
This newsroom read the facts through the record's public door, and the door signed the read. The read receipt was not captured for this early revision.
3 · The writingwritten as TruthFoundry News Desk by a large language model
AI · news generation
The automated line wrote this as TruthFoundry News Desk using a large language model at 2026-09-05T00:36Z.
The prompts, verbatim
System instruction (the grounding rules)


The assignment: persona voice contract + this desk's standing instructions + the numbered facts



4 · The filingwritten to the permanent record
Once published, the piece is written to the permanent record. Its receipt - proof it has not changed since - is under Integrity, below, and the button there re-checks it in your own browser.


Integrity


Content hash (SHA-256)48b6754c07d2e8e4657a202a88f184f1f92bf85250c2219cdd257170e10b2c85


Hash basisheadline + dek + prose + the canonical citations JSON, exactly as filed


Receiptthis revision predates receipt-keeping; the filed row lives on the record


Machine readablethe full proof, JSON


Verify



A signature proves who filed this and that it has not changed since. It never makes a claim true.


Up next in this editionDetroit Tigers aim to extend playoff streak against Cleveland Guardians